Climate change. Is it natural or man made?

Question

Before you answer please click on address:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/march2007/090307warminghoax.htm

Answer 1

Natural – mostly.

I’m prepared to accept the possibility that mankind may be having an effect, but, based on the evidence I’ve seen, that effect is tiny and is certainly indistinguishable from the natural changes.

Bob above attacks Martin Durkin’s The Great Global Warming Swindle – even unforgivable ad hominem attacks – and yet quotes that “Gore's movie may be a little over dramatic, but it has the basic science right.”

Er, no it hasn’t!

http://www.cei.org/pdf/5539.pdf is a review of the science of An Inconvenient Truth. It includes the following statement:

“In An Inconvenient Truth, the only facts and studies considered are those convenient to Gore’s scare-them-green agenda—and in many instances, Gore distorts the evidence he presents. Nearly every significant statement Gore makes regarding climate science and climate policy is either one sided, misleading, exaggerated, speculative, or just plain wrong.”

Even Al Gore himself admits he’s exaggerating. He says; “…I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual solutions on how dangerous it (global warming) is…” (See http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=4938 )

In September of last year there was a technical meeting on climate change held in Sweden. Incidentally it was held at the same time that Al Gore was there promoting his film. The media fell over themselves to report on Al Gore and his dodgy film, but no one bothered to mention the technical meeting with *real* scientists!

Anyway, at this meeting, those on the “global warming is dangerous” side of the argument included Professor Bert Bolin, first chairman of the UN’s IPCC. In an extraordinary outburst against a speaker discussing the carbon cycle, Professor Bolin suggested that the speaker might improve his knowledge if he consulted a textbook, and threatened to withdraw from the meeting if critical discussion continued. Happily, the other participants were undeterred by this intolerant disruption, and, after listening to some further comments by Professor Bolin, the meeting continued in constructive vein.

This is not how science is done! It just shows the double standards of the Global Warming Alarmists. They venomously attack anyone who tries to say that they’re wrong, whilst ignoring, or even defending, the errors made by the “faithful”.

So why *is* it happening? The obvious answer is: because it’s not science, it’s propaganda. You win the propaganda war by shouting loudest and winning the hearts of your audience – which is why we’re always hearing of the “terrible plight” of the polar bears (Except they’re doing fine, of course! - http://meteo.lcd.lu/globalwarming/Taylor/last_stand_of_our_wild_polar_bears.html )

As ever with global warming - don't believe the hype.

Answer 2

I was just doing some reading on this subject and found a very telling article stating data taken from the Vostok, Antarctica ice core. The graph plainly show a pattern of regularly rising and falling temperatures over that last 400k years. According to the graph we are currently in that time period where the temperatures have historically been rising. I found two interesting differences in this data.
First, the time from the start of the warming period to the peak was about 10k years 330k years ago, then about 5k years 240k years ago, and about 3k years 140k years ago. This current warming trend appeared to start about 15k years ago and has 2 degrees Celsius to go until the peak so how can scientists be telling us we are in the fastest warming period in the history of the planet?
Another interesting point on the graph is the obvious huge increase in CO2 doesn't seem to be causing any temperature difference in the long run.
I am assuming someone will come along to tell me this is false data or that I am reading the wrong conclusions from it, but looking at that graph, it really is hard to believe anything out of the ordinary is going on.

Answer 3

I didn't see this programme, but I did see Jeremy Clarkson's article on it - a man who has long said he thinks it's a scam.

I personally think that it's another government ploy to control us, and what we do. I think we have some kind of effect on global warming, but not as much as we are told.

I watched a very interesting episode of sliders once, where they were in a parrallel universe and the whole of los angeles had been turned into one big prison for America. Thing was, is that los angeles was suffering lots of earthquakes and the outside world knew that in the near future it would be totally destroyed, but didn't tell the inmates this as there would be anarchy and they would all break free if they knew they were all going to die.

I think a similar thing could be happening with global warming. I think our world is rapidly coming to an end, or near-enough. I believe scientists know this, but have to explain it in ways that make the general public believe they have some power to delay the process. Therefore keeping us under control. Because, if we all knew the world was going to be a boiling pit in 30 years time and there was not a thing we could do about it.... Would you be sat in your office? I certainly wouldn't!!

Good question by the way!

Answer 4

It is incredible that there are still people who provide no evidence of their own, but in the face of overwhelming evidence still insist GW is not real or not caused by human activity.

Its real and it is a direct result of human activity.

This situation has nothing to do with the normal temperature cycles of the planet. The longer we fart around blaming each other and denying the truth, the more damage will be done, the bigger the consequences and the harder it will be for our children to have a good life.

Your children will not be terribly impressed with you when they have to suffer the consequences of your refusal to see the truth.

I have seen a few of these so called anti GW docos, and not one relies on science. (well not the kind that passes muster. really sloppy experiments that any hifh school drop out could pull to pieces, faulty logic, mixing cause ans effect and lots of name dropping and shouting from the pulpit, but no hard evidence that can be verified. (or that even has a logic to it).

The science of the anti global warming caused by humans brigade is a scientific as that of the flat earthers, the creationists and the tabacco industry. Makes good fiction, but its a dangerous thing to foist on the ignorant masses.

I am not a GW fanatic, I do not predict doom and gloom, I do not believe we have to give up air travel or cell phones or much else to survive this, but I do believe that if humanity does not get its act togetyher to change course soon it will cause untold misery, and all for nothing. We can beat this but we have to act and do it now.

The only good thing is that those countries and companies and individuals who do act early will benifit most. Countries who keep their heads collectively burried will miss out and be left in the dust.

I believe that eventually we will have trade sanctions against rouge nations who refuse to stop using fossil fuels. They will be isolated and suffer huge economic losses.

Answer 5

I'm not sure because I watched this programme and so I was persuaded by it and so now I think it is mainly nature. However, before I thought it was man made. Whatever the case, isn't it true that there were ice ages before and hot periods? So surely it is nature.

Whatever the case, I still think we should change to renewable energy and reduce the amount of coal, gas and oil used because although it can not be proved to cause global warming, it is true that they are running out quickly.

Answer 6

Oh, come on...each of us knows that it is man made. The nature existed long time before our appearing. And it worked well. But what happened then?! The human population appeared and all changed. We, the humans, want to have everything, to do everything, only because we are smart, we have consience. That's great, but what about the other living things? They are also a miracle of the nature, because they bread, they live, simply they exist. And they are endangered, because of the human's selfishness. The global warming is a result of the human's overreaching, and unknowing to share things with others. So, we should care about our enviorment, because it's our first mother, it made us and with its help we grew up. We should care about the animals, the plants, all around us. Thank you in advance.
P.S. Maybe I have some mistakes in my spelling, but I believe that you understood what I've written. IT'S NOT IMPORTANT THE WAY, IT'S IMPORTANT THE THOUGHT.

Answer 7

There are various concepts of climate change
the Global warming ,and green house effect and Mand destruction of the forests.

If we do go on ,we dont need Global warming to turn this planet into a dessert with out much potable water to drink ,in the days we will cook and in the nights we will freeze ,

And we can achieve this all by our selves .Irrespective of the galectic popularity of Global Warming

In Africa I have seen lush wooded lands change into dessert within a few years by large invading comunities ,who devoured the trees for building and firewood ending up in a dessert with out water
and with a hot sun under which no new plantation was possible.The people had changed their climate,this happens all over Africa.

In Northern china two mayor dessert are merging and 900 vilages are buried under the dust ,thousands of refugee farmers who had changed their climate ,by intensive agressive agriculture are fleeing for their lives,

This happens all over the world .it happened in the 20ties in the USA has everybody forgotton that ,was this not a climate change ?

Granted the climatic changes are local ,but effects neighboring areas ,there is less rainfall, rivers dry up ,

Collectively because there is so much of it all over the world ,the global precipitation is affected and so is the climate .

And who did it ???

the people are changing the climate

Like Ghengas Kahn changed the climate when he burned all the forests and filled the wells with sand ,Like the Phoenicians changed the climate of lebanon to build the trading fleet .Like the Spanish climate was changed by using their forest to build the Armada ,

So are we today changing the climate by massive deforestation,agressive corporate farming (using chemicals),overgrazing ,overpumping deep subteranean waters ,ignorence and impartiality

Global warming.carbon emisions ,polution ,sunspots ,solar flares,hairsprays , Al Gore, and skeptics are the rasberries on top

and read up what America is planning with the insane master plan for Ethanol production
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AgOBUsPFRXJ3TYRGCXtxK6Lty6IX?qid=20070530195737AACbd5b&show=7#profile-info-fHbzOdoIaa

Seems as if America is trying to compete with Global warming,maybe even on purpose ,As far as the Global control is concerned (Bilderberg group etc ,)Global warming would play the global comunity right into the NWO´s hands

Answer 8

The Great Global Warming Swindle is utter garbage and it's a shame that it was presented in the way that it was because there are some people who think it's a genuine documentary.

The sole intention of Martin Durkin (the producer) was to cause controversy, this is what he does. He styles himself as a revolutionary, a communist and a Marxist in order to stir up controversy.

He picks a subject, one that he knows nothing about, then produces a TV programme that flies in the face of scientific facts and public opinion. He has a string of such documentaries to his name and in some cases the 'evidence' he presents is dangerous to human health. No wonder than that he has a string of judgements entered against him and the mainstream broadcasters refuse to air his programmes.

http://profend.com/global-warming/pages/myths.html#26

Answer 9

Mostly man made. That "documentary" is bogus.

"A Channel 4 documentary claimed that climate change was a conspiratorial lie. But an analysis of the evidence it used shows the film was riddled with distortions and errors."

http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/climate_change/article2355956.ece

"Pure Propaganda"

http://www.medialens.org/alerts/07/0313pure_propaganda_the.php

Explanations of why the science is wrong.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/03/swindled/

History of the director.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Durkin_(television_director)

Gore's movie may be a little over dramatic, but it has the basic science right. This movie does not.

Channel 4 itself undercuts the movie in a funny way. If you go to their website on the movie you find links to real global warming information. They also have a way to "Ask the Expert" about global warming. The questions go to a respected mainstream scientist who supports (mostly) human responsibility for global warming.

So, why did Channel 4 broadcast it?

"The science might be bunkum, the research discredited. But all that counts for Channel 4 is generating controversy."

http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,2032572,00.html

Answer 10

While the smoke screen of global warming distracts everyone the Utility companies still get away with causing Acid Rain! Acid Rain is a bigger threat!